zeroshade commented on issue #1107: URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow-adbc/issues/1107#issuecomment-1749625812
In general this seems very reasonable to me and I like the idea. Though I think historically we've preferred enum defined option names rather than allowing arbitrary options? Also, in proto3 *all* fields are `optional` so the `optional` tag on those fields is extraneous and unnecessary, and also invalid syntax for proto3 (technically we already end up having to use `--experimental_allow_proto3_optional` for FlightSql but I'd prefer to avoid adding more cases of `optional` in the proto file if we can avoid it) -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
